D&D General Of Consent, Session 0 and Hard Decisions.

[Scribe]

Hey Scribe we're playing a module with horrible child abuse, you down?
Uh, I have a really bad time with that. Can see do something else?
Nope, sorry. That's ruining our fun for your selfish needs. Call you in a few months when we finish.

Vs

Hey Scribe we're playing a module with horrible child abuse, you down?
Uh, I have a really bad time with that. Can see do something else?
Sure. I guess we can run the one where you fight the Giant Lords instead.
Sounds great. I'll see you this weekend.

You of course see, that in your version of events, I am causing the group to change based on my own feelings, in contrast to my version of events, where I take personal responsibility for myself.

Its not up to the world to coddle me, either I choose to engage with the game, or not. Its certainly not the end of the world.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So we are back to "sorry, arachnophobic friend, but I'm running City of the Spider Queen, so don't let the door hit you on the way out."

I expect you would be more polite to a fellow gamer whether they're your friend or not (why is this "friend" thing coming up? People play with strangers and acquaintances all the time).

Look, my wife is arachnophobic, and I don't use spiders in my game as a result. But that's a very well-known issue that is easily dodged (especially if like me you kinda hate Drow). But not every possible deal breaker is like that, and I will not make a blanket statement that one person's issues always override everyone else. Sometimes the best move is for the one person to not participate in this specific activity.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sounds more like "I understand your concerns, I just don't care."

You're not likely to get very far in this discussion if you continue to cast those who don't agree with you as bad actors making a wrong moral choice.

 

[Remathilis]

You of course see, that in your version of events, I am causing the group to change based on my own feelings, in contrast to my version of events, where I take personal responsibility for myself.

Its not up to the world to coddle me, either I choose to engage with the game, or not. Its certainly not the end of the world.

Like I said, I'm glad I game with people who have empathy and kindness.

 

[Remathilis]

You're not likely to get very far in this discussion if you continue to cast those who don't agree with you as bad actors making a wrong moral choice.

I'm specifically addressing Scribes take, but if the shoe fits...

 

[Scribe]

Like I said, I'm glad I game with people who have empathy and kindness.

Which is a completely irrelevant addition to the conversion. Empathy and kindness never enter the equation. If I, me/personal, do not want to engage with something, it is my choice to not do so.

Why do you seem to expect others to bow to your feels, instead of just...dont play that game/module/whatever as a personal choice?

When did it become a negative (its OK, I can guess when) for people to take personal responsibility?

 

[Remathilis]

Which is a completely irrelevant addition to the conversion. Empathy and kindness never enter the equation. If I, me/personal, do not want to engage with something, it is my choice to not do so.

Why do you seem to expect others to bow to your feels, instead of just...dont play that game/module/whatever as a personal choice?

When did it become a negative (its OK, I can guess when) for people to take personal responsibility?

When did it become a negative to take into consideration the feelings and problems of others? It's a game. If your desire for a specific element in the game is more important than the comfort and safety of your friend, you're not really their friend.

 

[FrogReaver]

When did it become a negative to take into consideration the feelings and problems of others?

Never. But taking others into consideration flows both ways.

It's a game. If your desire for a specific element in the game is more important than the comfort and safety of your friend, you're not really their friend.

there’s more ways to ensure the comfort and safety of your ‘friend’. One is for your ‘friend’ to voluntarily opt out of a game that doesn’t work for them. This seems to me the most reasonable course of action to ensure comfort and safety.

One might even suggest that a ‘real friend’ wouldn’t use the friendship to insist you not do something you find fun even if it means they don’t get to participate this time.

 

[Scribe]

When did it become a negative to take into consideration the feelings and problems of others? It's a game. If your desire for a specific element in the game is more important than the comfort and safety of your friend, you're not really their friend.

I am literally giving you examples where I have made a personal choice to not impact the group, and to remove myself.

I'm not excluding anyone, and nobody is 'unsafe' lol.

My feelings are taking into consideration when given 'fair warning' that content I dont want to engage with, is included.

Its still my personal responsibility to make the choice for me, instead of for the rest of the group.

 

[Steampunkette]

My friends know that I'm afraid of rabbits. They wouldn't invite me to a game of Bunnies and Burrows.

If you buy a copy of "City of the Spider Queen" and reach out to a friend you know is arachnophobic to join in you're kind of a jerk.

If you don't know and reach out and learn and then don't play that game with them, cool.

Whether "They remove themself" or you rescind the offer or you choose to run a different adventure because you want to spend time with them. There is no wrong path outside of being like "This is what we're playing and you HAVE TO PLAY because the rest of us want to play and otherwise you're being a bad friend!"

As far as the 'Laughing out Loud' at someone feeling unsafe because of a game... Jesus what a jerk thing to say.

Please don't buy my products.